The application of the general theory of relativity to the cosmological plane has led to a significant change in traditional notions on the space-time structure of the universe. This has been expressed in a new formulation and solution of cosmological problems such as that of a single world space and time, the problem of selection of a cosmological model for description of the universe, and the problem of the infinity of the universe.

An examination of time as featured in the General Theory of Relativity, which supercedes Einstein’s Special Theory, serves to rekindle the issue of the existenceof absolute time. In application to cosmology, Einstein’s General Theory yields models of the universe featuring a worldwide time which is the same for all observers in the universe regardless of their relative motion. Such a cosmic time is a rough physical measure of Newton’s absolute time, which is based ontologically (...) in the duration of God’s being and is more or less accurately recorded by physical clocks. (shrink)

Weinberg's 1972 work, in his description, had two purposes. The first was practical to bring together and assess the wealth of data provided over the previous decade while realizing that newer data would come in even as the book was being printed. He hoped the comprehensive picture would prepare the reader and himself to that new data as it emerged. The second was to produce a textbook about general relativity in which geometric ideas were not given a starring (...) role for (in his words) too great an emphasis on geometry can only obscure the deep connections between gravitation and the rest of physics. (shrink)

The philosophical literature on time and change is fixated on the issue of whether the B-series account of change is adequate or whether real change requires Becoming of either the property-based variety of McTaggart's A-series or the non-property-based form embodied in C. D. Broad's idea of the piling up of successive layers of existence. For present purposes it is assumed that the B-series suffices to ground real change. But then it is noted that modern science in the guise of Einstein's (...) general theory poses a threat to real change by implying that none of the genuine physical magnitudes countenanced by the theory changes its value with time. The aims of this paper are to explain how this seemingly paradoxical conclusion arises and to assess the merits and demerits of possible reactions to it. (shrink)

The considerations of Part I are extended and the experimental data and hypotheses that led to the establishment of the general theory of relativity are analyzed. It is found that one of the fundamental assumptions is that light is propagated homogeneously; i.e., by using arbitrary systems of coordinates, propagation of light can be represented by a homogeneous quadratic form. This is shown to be an assumption that can be verified by experiment, at least in principle. As a (...) result of adding a number of further assumptions to this, the usual formalism of the general theory of relativity can be established. In the above point of view, the general theory of relativity—like any other theory—cannot be built upad hoc, but is built on distinct physical hypotheses, each of which can be subjected to test by experiment. (shrink)

Excerpt from Vector Analysis and the Theory of Relativity One of the most striking effects of the publication of Einstein's papers on generalized relativity and of the discussions which arose in connection with the subsequent astronomical observations was to make students of physics renew their study of mathematics. At first they attempted to learn simply the technique, but soon there was a demand to understand more; real mathematical insight was sought. Unfortunately there were no books available, not (...) even papers. Dr. Murnaghan's little book is a most successful attempt to supply what is a definite need. Every physicist can read it with profit. He will learn the meaning of a vector for the first time. He will learn methods which are available for every field of mathematical physics. He will see which of the processes used by Einstein and others are strictly mathematical and which are physical. Every chapter is illuminating, and the treatment of the subject is that of a student of mathematics and is not developed ad hoc. The extension of surface and line integrals is most interesting for physicists and the discussion of the space relations in a four-dimensional geometry is one most needed. This is specially true concerning the case of point-symmetry which forms the basis of Einstein's formulae for gravitation as applied to the solar system. I feel personally that I owe to this book a great debt. I have read it with care and shall read it again. It has given me a definiteness of understanding which I never had before, and a vision of a field of knowledge which before was remote. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be (...) preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. To ensure a quality reading experience, this work has been proofread and republished using a format that seamlessly blends the original graphical elements with text in an easy-to-read typeface. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the "public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be (...) preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

This excellent, semi-technical account includes a review of classical physics (origin of space and time measurements, Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomy, laws of motion, inertia, and more) and coverage of Einstein’s special and general theories of relativity, discussing the concept of simultaneity, kinematics, Einstein’s mechanics and dynamics, and more.

This chapter sets forth a general theory of gender stratification. While both biological and ideological variables are taken into account, the emphasis is structural: It is proposed that the major independent variable affecting sexual inequality is each sex's economic power, understood as relative control over the means of production and allocation of surplus. For women, relative economic power is seen as varying-and not always in the same direction-at a variety of micro- and macrolevels, ranging from the household to (...) the state. A series of propositions links the antecedents of women's relative economic power, the interrelationship between economic and other forms of power, and the forms of privilege and opportunity into which each gender can translate its relative power. (shrink)

Modern readers turning to Einstein’s famous 1905 paper on special relativity may not find what they expect. Its title, “On the electrodynamics of moving bodies,” gives no inkling that it will develop an account of space and time that will topple Newton’s system. Even its first paragraph just calls to mind an elementary experimental result due to Faraday concerning the interaction of a magnet and conductor. Only then does Einstein get down to the business of space and time and (...) lay out a new theory in which rapidly moving rods shrink and clocks slow and the speed of light becomes an impassable barrier. This special theory of relativity has a central place in modern physics. As the first of the modern theories, it provides the foundation for particle physics and for Einstein’s general theory of relativity; and it is the last point of agreement between them. It has also received considerable attention outside physics. It is the first port of call for philosophers and other thinkers, seeking to understand what Einstein did and why it changed everything. It is often also their last port. The theory is arresting enough to demand serious reflection and, unlike quantum theory and general relativity, its essential content can be grasped fully by someone merely with a command of simple algebra. It contains Einstein’s analysis of simultaneity, probably the most celebrated conceptual analysis of the century. (shrink)

Comprehensive coverage of the special theory (frames of reference, Lorentz transformation, relativistic mechanics of mass points, more), the general theory ...

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

We have parameterized Einstein’s thought experiment with atomic clocks, supposing that we knew neither if the space and time are relative or absolute, nor if the speed of light was ultimate speed or not. We have obtained a Parameterized Special Theory of Relativity (PSTR) (1982). Our PSTR generalized not only Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, but also our Absolute Theory of Relativity, and introduced three more possible Relativities to be studied in the future. After (...) the 2011 CERN’s superluminal neutrino experiments, we recall our ideas and invite researchers to deepen the study of PSTR, ATR, and check the three new mathematically emerged Relativities 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5. (shrink)

This book originally appeared in 1920 under the title Relativitätstheorie und Erkenntnis Apriori and was the first of Reichenbach's numerous writings on the philosophical problems of relativity theory, space, and time. In this book the author attempted to show how Kant's theory of the a priori, especially concerning the concept of the a priori as "constituting the concept of [the] object" in question, comes into irrevocable conflict with certain facts of both the General and Special theories (...) of relativity; and that, therefore, we must amend Kant's treatment of the role of the a priori in knowledge accordingly. The translator, Maria Reichenbach, has provided a long and useful introduction, placing the work in the context of Reichenbach's philosophical career and activities, and providing background material on the author himself. This is the second of a continuing series of works by Reichenbach to appear under the California Press imprint.—P. J. M. (shrink)

In all societies, past and present, one can find social relationships marked by political domination. Properly understood, domination is a great evil, the suffering of which ought to be minimized so far as possible. This being so, it stands to reason that political and social theorists would have attempted a general analysis of the concept of domination. Surprisingly, however, this is not the case. General accounts of political domination are few and far between; even among those that can (...) be found, most are brief, ad hoc, restricted to one or another aspect or form of domination, hopelessly vague, or some combination of these. None discusses the relative advantages or disadvantages of two or more competing conceptions. This study aims to redress this lacuna. It argues first, that domination should be understood as a condition suffered by persons or groups to the extent that they are dependent on a social relationship in which some other person or group wields arbitrary power over them. This is called the arbitrary power conception of domination. It argues second, that we should regard it as wrong to perpetrate or permit the unnecessary suffering of domination, and that as a matter of justice the political and social institutions of any society should be organized so as to minimize domination to the extent that this is possible. This is called justice as minimizing domination, a conception of political or social justice. This study employs a variety of methodological techniques---including conceptual analysis, formal modeling and game theory, social theory, and moral philosophy. Existing accounts of dependency, power, social convention, political liberty, and so on are clarified, expanded, or revised along the way. For these reasons, this study should appeal to a broad audience with diverse methodological and substantive interests. (shrink)

Summary It is here shown that the relativistic doctrine of the relativity of simultaneity is untenable and that both the special and general theories of relativity are inconsistent. It is also shown that the theories can perhaps be made consistent, but excessively weak, through the reintroduction of absolute space and a weakening of the Lorentz transformations. Non-relativistic hypotheses for some events thought to require relativity are suggested. Finally, some conjectures are made on how so wrong a (...) theory could have been accepted by so many for so long. (shrink)

A theory of relativity, along with its appropriate group of Lorentz-type transformations, is presented. The theory is developed on a metric withR×S 3 topology as compared to ordinary relativity defined on the familiar Minkowskian metric. The proposed theory is neither the ordinary special theory of relativity (since it deals with noninertial coordinate systems) nor the general theory of relativity (since it is not a dynamical theory of gravitation). The (...) class='Hi'>theory predicts, among other things, that finite-mass particles in nature have maximum rotational velocities, a prediction highly supported by recent experiments on 14 nuclei, such as 159 Yb that survives fission with angular velocities of up to 0.9 of the predicted value but does not reach it. (shrink)

The Special Theory of Relativity: Based on a short course of lectures delivered in the late 1930s, this short book presents the theory of Special Relativity by formulating a redefinition of the measurement of length, and thus will appeal to students of physics who wish to think through Einstein's thought without the encumbrance of quasi-scientific concepts and language. Relativity: A Very Elementary Exposition: This brief lecture, delivered in October 1921 and published for the first time (...) in 1925, offers an explanation of Einstein's theory of Special Relativity for the non-scientist, giving a general overview that does justice both to the actual physics involved, and the wider implications of this revolutionary discovery of the 20th century. (shrink)

During Einstein’s lifetime, the special and general theories of relativity were quite frequently interpreted by philosophers. Most of these interpretations actually were misinterpretations. Even today interpretative statements about relativity theory are often false or highly misleading. Why is this so? In my Ph.D. dissertation (Hentschel 1990a), I analyzed (mis)interpretations by 10 different philosophical schools active in the early twentieth century which widely differed in their approaches, emphasis and blind spots. Many of these interpreters – including philosophers (...) of high standing such as Ernst Cassirer, Moritz Schlick or Joseph Petzoldt – had studied the theory intensely and many even had close contact with Einstein himself or with one of the members of his “protective belt” of close friends and allies. Rather than declaring all of these (mis)interpreters as either luminaries or idiots (which would be implausible, if not downright silly), I show structurally how these misunderstandings arose and why they were kind of unavoidable, even for highly qualified and often well-informed interpreters. More popular texts about relativity theory were often second-order interpretations of these first-order accounts, thus multiplying the first-order errors of misinterpretations. I will give a few characteristic examples but my focus will rather be on structural characteristics of these misinterpretations. I will discuss how to analyze them historically by means of interpretational frames. A link will also be made to Ludwik Fleck’s thesis that socially and cognitively stabilized “thought collectives” (“Denkkollektive”) exert strong constraints on human thinking and interpretation (“Denkzwang”). My concept of interpretational frames is one method to formalize and analyze the complex interrelations between different assumptions and inferences within such a frame of thinking (“Denkstil”). Semantic frames and word clouds are also discussed as alternative approaches but both are discarded as unsuitable for the purpose of reconstructing interpretative frames. (shrink)

In a way similar to classical mechanics where we have the concept of inertial time as expressed in the motions of bodies, in the theory of relativity we can regard the inertial time as the only notion of time at play. The inertial time is expressed also in the propagation of light. This gives rise to a notion of clock—the light clock, which we can regard as a notion derived from the inertial time. The light clock can be (...) seen as a solution of the theory, which complies with the requirement that a clock to be so must have a rate that is independent from its past history. Contrary to Einstein’s view, we do not need the concept of “clock” as an independent concept. This implies, in particular, that we do not need to rely on the notions of atomic clock or atomic time in the theory of relativity. (shrink)

Relativity is the most important scientific idea of the twentieth century. Albert Einstein is the unquestioned founder of modern physics. His Special and General theories of Relativity introduced the idea to the world. In this classic short book he explains clearly, using the minimum amount of mathematical terms, the basic ideas and principles of his theory of Relativity. Unsurpassed by any subsequent books on Relativity, this remains the most popular and useful exposition of Einstein's (...) immense contribution to human knowledge. (shrink)

A non-ad hoc, general theory of anthropic reasoning can be constructed based on Bostrom's Strong Self-Sampling Assumption that we should reason as if the current moment of our life were a randomly selected member of some appropriate reference class of observer-moments. We do not need to use anything other than standard conditionalization of a hypothetical prior based upon the SSSA in order to estimate probabilities. But we need to make the SSSA precise. We specify exactly what is and (...) what is not an observer, how to choose a reference class and how to select a prior probability distribution that can be used when selecting randomly from the reference class. There are both collective Dutch Book and relative frequency arguments in favor of our rules for choosing priors and reference classes. In order to handle examples like Bostrom's Lazy Adam scenario, a causal anthropic decision theory is developed. (shrink)

Relativity is the most important scientific idea of the twentieth century. Albert Einstein is the unquestioned founder of modern physics. His Special and General theories of Relativity introduced the idea to the world. In this classic short book he explains clearly, using the minimum amount of mathematical terms, the basic ideas and principles of his theory of Relativity. Unsurpassed by any subsequent books on Relativity, this remains the most popular and useful exposition of Einstein's (...) immense contribution to human knowledge. (shrink)

Reichenbach wrote this book just after taking the first course Einstein ever taught on the theory of relativity. His important and influential work The Philosophy of Space and Time was written several years later and relied in part on the axiomatization of the special and general theories of relativity already worked out in this book. For special relativity Reichenbach divides his axioms into two sets, the light axioms which relate light signals to the topology and (...) metric of time and space, and the matter axioms which do the same for rigid rods and clocks. Thus the axioms focus on the conventions uniting theory and observation and give more insight into the physical foundations of the theory than do most axiomatizations. Reichenbach's approach has been criticized by Weyl and others, but at least some of the criticism seems to rest on a misunderstanding of what Reichenbach was attempting to do. Now that this early work has been translated into English, there is hope that it will be more widely read. There is no doubt that students of the theory or of recent philosophical discussion of space and time will profit from a careful reading of this book.--R. H. K. (shrink)

This is not a textbook in mathematical physics—excepting for one chapter one need not possess much more than geometry and elementary algebra—rather it is a philosophically reflective examination of the cardinal features of special relativity theory. Throughout the book Bohm is not merely doing physics, but thinking about doing physics as well. This metatheoretical reflexion appears in chapters concerning pre-Einsteinian notions of relativity, attempts to save the aether theories, the "ambiguity" of space-time measurements in the new cosmology, (...) "common sense" notions of space and time, and the falsification of scientific theories. There is a long appendix dealing with physics and perception—the relation between scientific objects and perceptual processes. One will, however, by working through the text learn plenty of physics in a rigorous and concise fashion. The author wisely does not attempt to cover the mathematically far more difficult and philosophically more profound General Theory of Einstein. In the area chosen, Bohm has written clearly and felicitously; this should serve a model for others who like to take their physics with a dollop of philosophy.—P. J. M. (shrink)

This book pieces together the jigsaw puzzle of Einstein's journey to discovering the special theory of relativity. Between 1902 and 1905, Einstein sat in the Patent Office and may have made calculations on old pieces of paper that were once patent drafts. One can imagine Einstein trying to hide from his boss, writing notes on small sheets of paper, and, according to reports, seeing to it that the small sheets of paper on which he was writing would vanish (...) into his desk-drawer as soon as he heard footsteps approaching his door. He probably discarded many pieces of papers and calculations and flung them in the waste paper basket in the Patent Office. The end result was that Einstein published nothing regarding the special theory of relativity prior to 1905. For many years before 1905, he had been intensely concerned with the topic; in fact, he was busily working on the problem for seven or eight years prior to 1905. Unfortunately, there are no surviving notebooks and manuscripts, no notes and papers or other primary sources from this critical period to provide any information about the crucial steps that led Einstein to his great discovery. In May 1905, Henri Poincare sent three letters to Hendrik Lorentz at the same time that Einstein wrote his famous May 1905 letter to Conrad Habicht, promising him four works, of which the fourth one, Relativity, was a rough draft at that point. In the May 1905 letters to Lorentz, Poincare presented the basic equations of his 1905 "Dynamics of the Electron", meaning that, at this point, Poincare and Einstein both had drafts of papers relating to the principle of relativity. The book discusses Einstein's and Poincare's creativity and the process by which their ideas developed. The book also explores the misunderstandings and paradoxes apparent in the theory of relativity, and unravels the subtleties and creativity of Einstein. (shrink)

Inertial frames and Lorentz transformations have a preferred status in the special theory of relativity (STR). Lorentz transformations, in turn, embody Einstein's convention that the velocity of light is isotropic, a convention that is necessary for the establishment of a standard signal synchrony. If the preferred status of Lorentz transformations in STR is not due to some particular bias introduced by a convention on signal synchronism, but to the fact that the Lorentz transformation group is the symmetry group (...) of the theory, then the signal synchronism is not a matter of convention but rather a matter of fact. In order to explore the conventionalist thesis, that within the frame of STR isotropy in the velocity of light and, hence, signal synchronism is a matter of convention, we need a generalized Lorentz transformation group that does not embody Einstein's isotropy convention, and upon which STR can be based. We present here a new approach to the resulting search for a generalized STR, which is well suited for establishing some well-known results of Winnie as well as some new results. (shrink)

The origination of General Systems Theory is credited to Ludwig von Bertalanffy who, two years after receiving his doctorate from the University of Vienna, published a work in 1932 entitled Theorie der Formbildung. Despite, by his own account, an exposure to and familiarity with the positivism of the Vienna circle, von Bertalanffy was dissatisfied with the reductionist and atomistic forms of explanation which this group asserted is characteristic of scientific explanation. He was particularly unhappy with attempts to pattern (...) explanations of biological phenomena after the model of classical Newtonian physics. In this early work, Models Theories of Development, von Bertalanffy maintained both that the main problem for biology is to discover patterns (laws) which are typical of biological systems and that the discovery of such patterns would produce a major change in the way the world is viewed in general. Von Bertalanffy worked out his proposed model for biological explanation in such subsequent books as Theoretische Biologie and Problems of Life and then in his later years in such works as Robots, Man and Minds and Organismic Psychology and Systems Theory, went on to apply his concepts in a cross-disciplinary way to psychology. Again, by his own account, at a somewhat later period, others, for example the economist Kenneth Boulding and the bio-mathematician A. Rapport, had arrived at, for parallel reasons, certain similar ideas relative to their own disciplines. These individuals together with others formed a joint enterprise which was to result in the interdisciplinary systems movement. Von Bertalanffy stressed the multi-dimension possibilities for fruitful research in a large number of conceptual areas, including the humanities, in his final major work, General Systems Theory Foundation, Development and Applications. (shrink)

The considerations of the two former articles concerning the special and general theories of relativity are extended. The question of the physical reality of the ether and the interpretation of some cosmological problems are discussed. A view is expanded according to which the metric tensor g is taken as the energy momentum tensor of the ether. The gravitational equation of Einstein is considered to represent the equations of motion of the ether. The cosmological red shift is also interpreted (...) in such terms. (shrink)

The theory of quantum gravitation, which is designed to unite the general relativity with the quantum field theory into one consistent theory, raises several major problems. The paper examines the limitations posed by general relativity on the efforts to create an ontological basis of the quantum theory of gravitation, which the latter ought to accept. It concerns mainly problems arising from relating the new field theory with the gravitational field in the (...) general theory of relativity, the problems of the autonomy of the space-time with its gravitational masses, as well as the problems of the covariance of the physical equations in the theory of quantum gravitation equations, the former being the consequence of the principle of a general covariance of the general relativity equations. (shrink)

The paper considers Cassirer’s account of the philosophical problems raised by the theory of relativity. The main question the paper addresses is how Cassirer, as a Neokantian, responds to the discoveries made by Einstein. The problem here is especially the presupposition of the a priori nature of Euclidean geometry. Cassirer’s answer lies in showing that Kant’s philosophy is broad enough to include also non-Euclidean geometries in the determination of the physical world. He does this by showing that though (...) Kant conceived space and time as forms of pure intuition he already connected them with certain theoretical factors, with the rules of the understanding. Space as the pure form of coexistence and time as the pure form of succession imply no special relations of measurement and it is thus a mistake to assume the a priori nature of Euclidean geometry. The way different geometries can figure in the determination of the physical world is explained in reference to the Klein approach to geometry, which defines geometrical properties as those that stay invariant according to a certain group of transformations. It is the concept of a group that is the real concept a priori. Group theory plays an even larger role in physical theories as well as Cassirer’s epistemology. Namely, with the theory of relativity it becomes evident that physical theories are theories of invariants according to a group of transformations. Cassirer claims that the general doctrine of invariability of certain values must recur in some form in any theory of nature, because it belongs to the logical and epistemological nature of such a theory. (shrink)